On needing to raise taxes

Devin and Greg, among others, have already commented on Stephen Harper's "need to raise taxes" soundbite and the likely aftermath. But it's worth pointing out that the Libs' response could have two radically different outcomes.

On the one hand, the Cons may conclude that Harper's statement leaves them with a far more difficult task in trying to use "raise taxes" messages against Michael Ignatieff. From there, their logical next step would be to turn to the next on their list of talking points ("no plan", I presume?) as their core message in branding Ignatieff. Which would seem to at least push federal-level debates toward topics less likely to affect what gets done in the future.

But it seems at least as likely that the Cons will barrel ahead with their current messaging in hopes that the theme sticks to Ignatieff more than it does to Harper. And if - as seems to be the case - the Libs respond by making exactly the same bet in reverse, then the combined effect of two parties harping mindlessly about how the mere contemplation of tax increases is an unforgivable sin for the competing party's leader figures to only further narrow the range of policy options needed to turn Canada's financial picture around once the recession is over with.

Of course, we've already seen how that type of situation can change in a hurry, as the 2008 campaign consensus that nobody would consider a deficit under any circumstances was overtaken by reality. But unlike a balance-sheet shift which happened due to outside forces as well as the Cons' own policy, future tax increases (however necessary they may be to get $50 Billion Deficit Jim's sea of red ink back under control) would actually require some active steps from the government of the day. And the more time Ignatieff and Harper spend now blathering that raising taxes at any point and for any reason would be the end of the world, the more difficult it will be for either to act even remotely responsibly later.